create_group

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Since no annotations are provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains the implications of megagroup (supergroup features vs old-style) and the limitation of 'about' to supergroups. It also hints at user validation (empty list allowed only for supergroups). This provides good behavioral context beyond basic functionality.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and uses a clear bullet list for arguments. The opening sentence '新建一个群。' is slightly redundant with the tool name, but overall it is concise and well-structured, with each sentence earning its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given that an output schema exists (as per context signals), the description need not explain return values. It sufficiently covers all parameters and their constraints, making the tool's capabilities clear for an AI agent to select and invoke.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It does so by explaining each parameter: title as group name, users as initial members (with format hint: @username or ID), megagroup with explicit boolean meaning, and about as group description with supergroup constraint. This adds substantial value over the raw schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool creates a group (新建一个群), and distinguishes between supergroup and old-style small group via the megagroup parameter. This differentiates from sibling tools like create_channel and create_forum_topic.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear usage context: it recommends supergroup (megagroup=True) and specifies that 'about' is only supported for supergroups. It also notes that initial members can be empty for supergroups. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like create_channel.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.